Thanks You Bookborn!!! Just googled the title of my self-published book about a baseball player who is sent to a minor league team in New Hampshire. Apparently, "The Catcher in the Rye" was already taken.
Self Pub authors that need readers on a budget should link up with other authors and trade feedback (aka critique partners). Just make sure you weed them out for competency, whether or not they actually read in your genre, and if they’ll follow through on their end (maybe try chapter by chapter or portion swaps and give them space to opt out if they aren’t clicking with your book… or vice versa)
Finding a good writing group is really hard but extremely helpful. You'll probably have to try a few out and that can be a lot of work, but like you said, trading critiques with people you trust is one of hte most hepful things you can do to improve your stories.
I’ve found aspiring-author patreons/discords that have great communities full of both best friends and willing beta-readers. It has simply been the best resource for improving my work, hands down. (Ellen Brock, in case anyone’s wondering - she’s an incredibly gifted youtube editor and highly recommended)!
@@wrafalkoThat is some excellent advice. I have been trying to get people to read my stuff for literal decades. I personally know about ten self-published authors (even one traditionally published) aaaaaaaand they don’t read books. None of my forays into wider/online spaces have worked out very well, but I never thought of a Patreon like Ellen Brock’s. Seems obvious, now that you’ve said it, but that’s the nature of genius I suppose. Thanks!
That last piece of advice rings true. There's a movie TH-camr named Chris Stuckmann who's taken no end of **** since he started making a crowd-funded movie of his own and, consequently, decided to move his channel "away from film criticism and toward film appreciation," as I believe he puts it. Hell, even just as a reader I once had the awkward experience of mentioning that I'd sampled a certain British horror/dark fantasy author a few times over the years and never been able to get into his work, only to have the man himself acerbically comment, "I agree."
Titles: not even more popular, but sometimes there are indie books I look for that have a dozen books of the same name or are extremely close. I think it makes it difficult to find. I'm an indie author as well (just starting out), and I think this is a pretty solid video. The biggest thing about beta readers for me was finding people willing to give some critical feedback (not just ones who read your genre). I thought it was all good, even sent it to some small indie reviewers, and everyone was giving it 4-5 stars. I sent it in to Daniel Greene (I had been watching him for a while and just wanted to see what would happen). He opened my package in a mail video and immediately said he was going to review it. He gave it a 3/10, but the feedback on the book was exactly what I needed to hear and I published a revised book last year based on that feedback. It's substantially better now, but it would have been nice to hear any of that feedback during the writing process.
Yeah that’s why I tried to focus on “people you trust” because that also means people you trust to give criticism! The example I gave of Brandon and I - that was some big, somewhat harsh criticism. But it was needed.
@@Bookborn getting that network in place is key. The only reader I really knew was my wife, 1) it's not her genre, 2) she didn't feel comfortable providing feedback. It may take a bit, but building those communities is also an important part of becoming an author. Lesson learned!
Thank you Bookborn!! As an author myself (Swedish) I spent years editing my novel along with an editor and several beta readers and other authors who I critique swapped my book with, and then it got published by a small press in 2020. It takes time to write something good, and there are no shortcuts! Badly edited books hurts us all as authors, especially us authors who aren't famous. We already have to prove that we are serious authors when competing with the big names, and self-published books having a bad reputation hurts us even more. I have translated my Swedish epic fantasy novel now into English and I am going through the same process (though not with a developmental editor) with English native speaking beta readers, just to have the novel as well written as possible. As a Swede, I know that my English is not native level, so I miss lots of things that a native reader would pick up on. I take this seriously, as the Swedish novel got some five and several four star reviews. (It is kind of like a Swedish ASOIAF, but with much less sexual violence, set in a Scandinavian fantasy setting). I know it is a good book so I am taking this seriously.
Great advice. And thank you! I completely agree. I don't think writers should be serious reviewers. I feel weird saying that since my book has gotten good reviews from my peers-well written, insightful, and reasonably (?) fair. But I do think it can lead to conflicts of interest. Elliot Brooks and Daniel Green are notable exceptions for the reason you stated. They've firmly established their brand as a reviewer. (Sidenote: Le Guin has some spectacularly savage takedowns of other authors, but it's less a review and more of a hit job. If you're going to do that, you better aim for the head.) If I wanted to be a reviewer, I don't think I'd have the bandwidth to do both. Being a good reviewer takes a lot of time, talent, and energy. My editing process: Alpha reader (my wife) --> Developmental editor --> Copy editor --> Beta readers --> Proofreader. This process is so involved and time consuming; I don't know if I could ever release more than one book a year. I spend a lot of time just being a project manager.
While I think a benefit of self-publishing is how much quicker the process can go, I agree with you that it still takes TIME. In general, if you want to make a quality product, you have to be willing to take that time - especially if your beta reviewers aren't paid, and are doing it in their free time. I didn't look up Le Guin...I need to go see her take downs lmao.
Some of my favorite BookTubers have become self-published authors and I’ve been very supportive of their work but it does change the way I view them as reviewers. I haven’t stopped watching any of them but I just have to approach their reviews a little differently now that they have more skin in the game.
Yeah, I think this is a huge factor too. If they are reviewing books they are friends with, you might question how honest the review is. It's only natural!
Wholeheartedly agree on the developmental edit piece! I originally went trad until my agent quit the industry and I decided to self-publish, and I benefitted IMMENSELY from the rounds of developmental editing with my agent AND the feedback from big house editors. I don't regret facing those hurdles and critiques at all. Generally I agree about the "don't be a reviewer as an author," except in the indie-sphere it causes a problem: it creates a dearth of honest, helpful reviews at the beginning stage. Everyone's either "hyping" a book or silent on it. Personally I'd take the review, good or bad. But I understand it's alienating, so *sigh* I suppose I agree. Lastly, I was so bummed when I saw you weren't going to be a judge this year in SPFBO on the off-chance that my book was assigned to you. Glad for you to take a needed break, but you have such good reviews and insights!
Your second paragraph IS TRUE, but it's such a hard thing to fix. I think it can only be done through finding a writing group of peers that you all trust each other enough to be truthfully critical about the work. But I think it needs to happen in the editing stage - aka, when things can still be changed. I think criticism after the fact from peers can be difficult. But it's also a problem among reviewers. Because with self-pub'd, there is often less of a distance between author and reviewer, AND because we feel that our reviews may "mean more" because they are getting fewer reviews than trad pub'd authors, it can soften reviews. We don't want to crush these authors dreams! They are usually some of hte kindest, coolest people I've ever talked to! But I had to finally realize that as a reviewer, I had to be honest, or else it would ultimately hurt self-pub'd in the long run. but, idk. ITS ALL HARD lol
Editing has definitely improved, the prevalency of them was the problem with self pub. But based on the few I've read back when that first started becoming an avenue via KDP to now, it seems like it's not happening as frequently - self pub authors seem to be investing more in their books than before also. I also agree with you on the third point, it's why I'll be avoiding certain books on here that I notice other reviewers will jump on and inevitably hype - those opinions can't be trusted anyway.
As Somebody who's working on his first Selfpublishing Release myself, I can totally agree with you on all of the Advices, especially the last One. Not because I think, that it wouldn't be possible to be a serious Reviewer and Writer at the same Time, but more because of the Polarized Times we're living in these Days. Thx for the Video. Highly appreciated it. 😁
Lots of great advice. Thank you. I just published my first book and went through so many of the "editing" options you mentioned. It took me a bit to realize that less is more when it comes to having your book edited. With regard to your comments on reviewing, I can see what you mean. I have read for years and reviewed here and there, but only on Goodreads. I actually don't do any video reviewing. I'd prefer not to. What I think is actually more important as a "writer" is not to read your reviews. STay out of the reviewers spaces with regards to your own book. Now that I agree with 100% :)
I'm a musician first and want to write as more of a side hobby but most of this advice applies to that as well, you don't want to leave bad reviews on other works because then it looks like you're trying to bring everyone else down to lift you up.
Worked in self publishing for a few years. This is spot on. There were some amazing authors, but also, my goodness, so many people refused to listen to professional advice.
What an interesting video. If you think about it, it just really makes sense not to review your colleagues' work online. When my colleague does something that could be better, I'll go to them if I think it is important enough. This will help them much more.
I plan to self publish and think this is great advice. I have reviewed some books, but I haven’t been too critical. If I don’t like elements, I tend to keep it to myself and focus on what was done well and who I think the right target audience of the book is. If it’s really awful I don’t review. But I also don’t have a ton of time to review anyway, so some books I’ve been meaning to review are still outstanding. I will really give some thought to my strategy here. Thanks for the thought provoking comments.
I feel weird every time I post a review that isn’t five stars. I love how you articulated that because I felt disigenuine for not wanting to post reviews for books I don’t love.
On reviewing as an author: You mention the problem of alienating a significant part of the people who might otherwise help you sell your book (I agree it's a significant problem). There's also the problem of not wanting to say critical things about the babies of your friends, which can make it both difficult and unpleasant to give honest reviews. Am I rating this book 5-star because it's legitimately brilliant or is that affected by it having been written by my friend? Or am I looking for flaws in what would otherwise be a 5-star read in an attempt to bend over backwards for fairness? And finally, I'm pretty sure I've heard Sanderson say that he won't make critical comments about any but the most successful authors' work, because it can be, or be seen to be, "punching down", which isn't a good look either.
yes yes yes to all of this. Besides it not looking good, you're absolutely right that the more you know someone, the more predisposed you'll be to like their work. Which also means people might trust your ratings less. That is, unless you're KNOWN For being brutally honest. Which...comes full circle to alienating your peers.
Finding editors that will give you criticism instead of just support, outside of that trad business infrastructure, can be difficult i imagine. I would want to just tell them they're great! Established authors, I look at less as reviewers, and more like curators.
curators is a great word for it. And yeah, it's difficult, it's true. Networking is probably one of hte most important things in success of a self-pub'd author.
Yes, I do kind of want to disagree on the last point but I think there probably is at least some truth to what you're saying, even if I don't like it and don't agree completely. I do think people should be allowed to say whatever they want about books, but I realize you're not saying they shouldn't, you're just saying that it is probably better for one's prospects as an author. Of course, great video, as usual, and I'm pretty sure I've had that same experience with the titles of self-pub books.
I'm laughing because you did come around to what I said in the end 😂People can absolutely do whatever they want! It just doesn't always mean it's a good idea lol
Mark Lawrence seems to be doing reviews on Goodreads. Although I find his reviews are always more about his personal journey with the book than an actual critical review.
The title thing, ugh. When I put out my first book nobody had my exact title. Then Disney/Pixar came out with the same title years later. I've been buried! It's so frustrating.
I usually only rate books on Goodreads. I usually have a good idea if I will like a book before I read it, so I won't normally need to rate something 3 stars or below. I will leave written reviews for indie published books that I particularly enjoyed, and will try to leave ARC reviews for my indie author friends if I am able to read the book before the release date.
Yeah, I don't think reviewing PERIOD is bad, but being a review-er is different than just reviewing books. What you've stated is pretty close to what a lot of authors do - giving reviews out to books they've received arcs for (usually, if not always, positive). I don't think it's bad to still rate books, but being an actual, critical reviewer, is very different, ya know?
omg as soon as you said "I only found one author who did reviews" I KNEW it was Rothfuss. I randomly come across his reviews on goodreads and sometimes, they are just... weird. He'll give a book 5 stars but in his review he mostly just talks about himself or something completely unrelated. It always felt weird to see a famous, established author doing reviews
A lot of older weird fiction -- Arthur Machen, etc. -- is predominantly available in self--published editions from budding Amazon entrepreneurs, and the frequent, knock me right out of the story typo struggle is real.
The amount of books being released has made it hard to create original titles. You're right, though, if there is already some bestseller out there, your book will get buried.
Yeah I don't think you need to be completely original or anything - even tweaking an adjective or noun can go a long way though to make it slightly different.
Honestly, I used to read every self pub book that came across my desk, and in the past year or so I had to start becoming significantly more selective with what I decide to read. There are some amazing stand outs in the self pub community but I was constantly hearing "oh I only did one round of edits" or "no, I've actually never taken any writing classes" and the quality in a lot of the books I was reading reflected this. Don't get me wrong, I love self pub, some of ny favorite books are self pub, but I havent seen one in a WHILE that had a consistent quality. Every now and then I'll pick one up though.
I’m curious, do you have a process for selecting the few of the many that show up your desk? What is it that makes a book in the pile stand out to you?
Love hearing the developmental editing advice! Thanks for that! As for authors being reviewers, I see where you're coming from, but also have a personal counter example. I review my peers on Facebook, and I'm pretty good at it. My posts regularly get 50-150 likes and many comments full of words and discussions. That is a product of me picking the right pics + being thorough and thought-provoking in the review. Also I try to be fun :) I can get a song to earworm into people when I review :) I can make them laugh often :) I know my audience :) Haven't gotten into any issues with this, ever. I choose my words carefully. Few examples: 1) "This wasn't for me" 2) "Here's 3 things I liked and 3 things I didn't like about this book" 3) "I don't recommend this to MY audience, but here is the audience that I DO recommend this to" My only weakness is DNFs. When I start someone's book and dislike it so bad that I can't finish, usually that author and I get into bad terms :( Still, it's worth the audience that I'm gathering with my reviews :)
I'm glad you feel it's working out for you! I still stand by what I said though. You know your audience, and I'm guessing your audience is not other authors - which is usually the case with reviews. But that doesn't mean you know exactly how other authors are taking your reviews. Perhaps it will be worth the audience you've gained in the end, only you'll be able to decide!
Kind of hate to say it but I think you're right about the last point. I don't feel comfortable giving fewer than 5 *s to my friends, and that makes me a lousy reviewer (my channel has no reviews, I just talk about elements of books).
Yeah and I think talking about books in that way is a great choice! I know Jed Herne has a lot of success with his channel about writing - I think it’s the way to go for authors who want a presence like that
I’m a college student and can’t afford a real dev editor, but I totally agree with the stuff about having lots of beta readers and ones who read in your genre. My family doesn’t read any epic fantasy but my friends do and I also have a writing group that writes epic fantasy that I run it through as well. And then I’ll hire a couple of beta readers who read in my genre from fiverr ive found that are fairly cheap but seem good. Hopefully it’s enough editing, time will tell I suppose lol.
I only list books on Goodreads I really like. I used to review on Amazon everything I read - good, bad, or indifferent - but that isn't an effective use of time. I try to support authors' books I enjoyed, traditional or indie published. Trying to give a good review of a book you didn't quite get into doesn't come off well.
Self publishing is a unique experience to each author, and each reader. When we say trad publishing it's often the big houses that come to mind. When we say self publishing the first thought is likely Amazon, and there is so much more variety to Amazon than a handfull of long standing publishing houses. It's sad to see some people lump all of these books into one umbrella of "self published." There are trends and themes of course, but its hardly as unifying a label as "traditionally published." All of this was great advice, I have been an author since I was 17 thanks to the accessability of publishing and largely that has spurred me to grow as a writer. There's a lot of condesencion as well as genuine advice on the topic. One is often framed as the other.
Good advice, especially about using beta readers. I don't think any debut author should invest more money into self publishing a book than what they can afford to lose, because they will likely lose most of it. That's the nature of the business. Discovery is the major hurtle to success in self publishing, and any money spent on editing won't help if the book is never even seen by readers. It may be a different story for established authors who can rely on sales to pay for professional help. I agree about not reviewing self published books unless they are really good. If I read one I don't like, I know that I'm simply not the right audience, so not liking it is on me, and don't review it. We're all in the same boat. Plus, the mostly trad published books I do review, I only post the reviews on my blog where few people read them. I just like playing the critic.
My plan if I were to ever self-publish is to keep my original personal Goodreads account to keep track of what I read (and review if I felt like it) and then have a separate author account. Do you think that would also be a bad idea?
Ms. Bookborn, all of your vids are great & informative :-) I'm also working on a script with strong female characters, & trying not to make them too "Mary Sue" :-O
I really agree with you on the last point. I'm a big fan of Elliott's channel, but I've noticed she's gotten more reticent in her reviews. Like she doesn't want to be "mean" to fellow indie authors. I haven't noticed that with Daniel, but he's overall more combative than she is. Lol.
Hey bookborn. I’m not on IG. Which books are you reading right now? Can we expect review of the remaining ASOIAF companion books ? (F&B and AWOIAF). Thanks
The main thing that takes me out of a book is when they write ‘they have another think coming’. You can’t have a think coming for you, it’s a thing, an object or something but definitely not a think!! It really annoys me that something so basic gets missed in editing. It’s basic English and they can’t even get it right, it’s so ridiculous😒
i feel like an aluminum ingot that just got extruded. your advice is very generous, thorough and obviously based on experience and involvement in the publishing industry, but from my own p.o.v., your 3 Things are only valuable for someone who is writing de facto as an employee of the publishing industry. we've got books - thousands daily - being self-published and pubbed traditionally...but the truly original is rare-earth metal that gets skimmed off and tossed away as slag in favor of pure genre.
Of all the authors out there… Totally hypothetically & just for fun… Do you think Abercrombie would be the best choice to finish ASOIAF? Which fantasy author you think would be best suited based on style etc? Be brave professor
I don't want anyone but Martin to finish ASOIAF. I'd rather it sit unfinished. I understand why people say Abercrombie - he is excellent at characters- but idk. I like the story Martin is telling and I just want him to finish it 🥲 even if that means never seeing Dream of Spring.
@@BookbornYeah I dont want anyone to finish his work… I think it’s a fascinating question as an exercise in how some authors are similar in style… or closer in feel whatever that means! while others are miles apart & on different planets though equally enjoyable… thanks!
Traditional publishers publish all different quality levels of books. It's a business, they need an income stream, but they still promote the idea that self-published books aren't as good. Readers don't so much care how a book is published. Rather, does the story pull them and in and make them turn the pages?
Idk, I haven't encountered traditionally published books that are riddled with errors. They usually have some sort of process because they are publishing houses with resources and to-do's in place, not to mention the hurdle of even getting an agent or getting a deal. Whereas, self-publishing has zero barriers, which means it's possible to have literally ZERO editing or processes. So I do think there is potentially a difference there. But I do think the quality of self-pub is rising.
@@Bookborn Some self-pub authors don't realize what they are getting into. There's a lot of responsibility. I've read some amazing self-pub books, and some terrible ones.
I don't trust Goodreads or any community social media-based site, because they all devolve into gatekeepers of what's considered "good" and "bad." Plus it's also ripe with people bringing their bias and baggage, just like that one woman who lost her deal by trying to game the system when she was outed for trashing other publishers. It becomes the issue of people who can't grow out of high school antics and over self-importance and aspirations of being "that guy/gal."
At least in the LitRPG sub-genre I disagree on the editing not being an issue. I get that there will always be a bit of minor punctuation/grammar issues in even trad published books, but even basic sentence structure gets brutally mutilated and repeats frequently in even the most popular series. The most common error that irritates me is a duplicated descriptive action. This is a bit exaggerated but it would be something like "They quietly crept down the hall in a quiet way because it was important to be quiet so the walked quietly." This type of repetitive descriptions in sentences permeates the genre and really distracts from the story.
I need more evidence. I am big Gaiman fan but always felt his sex life is a bit “punk rock”. Hearing this I am not surprised but I am pretty weary about the source. Also people make mistakes and this was supposed to be in consensual relationships. It depends how this is going to be handled. There’s a difference between abusing power and SA and grooming and making stupid mistakes in consensual relationship. Again, need more evidence. Need his response etc.
Thanks for putting yourself out there. I’m at a bit different place with it right now, but I really respect how you’re approaching it from multiple angles and trying not to rush to judgement.
I've considered making a video on it, actually - but I rewatched my video I made about a year ago about authors where you don't agree with their opinions/actions, and I realized I had said my entire piece back then. It was a really hard pill to swallow. I've talked about how much his words ahve meant to me, and I didn't realize that I really admired him. Now, of course, some of the accusations could be false - but Gaiman has admitted publicly that some of the stuff is true, and of the stuff he has admitted to, I am VERY uncomfortable with. Truthfully, I'm still not sure how I feel about it. I cannot take back what his words have meant to me. Nor do I think you need to be a good person to make good art. But, I'm conflicted about wanting to talk about his work because I find his behavior unacceptable.
@@Bookborn Thanks for going into your feelings about it. I remember that vid of yours. It's not an easy subject to talk about. There were recently some very difficult revelations about Alice Munro as well, an author that's loomed large in my life. We develop strong emotional connections with our impressions of who our favourite artists are, and it can be painful when these images are suddenly shattered.
@@bookdmb YES. I do not consider myself someone who worships celebrity, AT ALL. But I think when a piece of art has profoundly affected you, it's natural to project a bit onto what kind of person you think created it. IT can be difficult when that is shattered.
Yeah, authors need to give up on reviewing their peers for sure. Best case scenario, you make it public when you’re giving it 5 stars and keep the rest all private, or you keep it all private. I’m surprised this is controversial? It really is basic business sense and human interactions… you want to be free to trash your peers to a potential audience as an authoritative figure? I mean you can, but they absolutely will be pissed about it and either not support you or actively work against you in return.
What about a reviewer who doesn't try to trash any books, always looks for a positive, and then gets a lucky break and a book deal? Do they now have to stop reviewing books that they've read?
@@charissawilkinson9270 No, but they probably have to switch genres to ones they don't write in and/or only post their positive reviews. It would be unwise to trash the books of authors in a genre they're writing in. They can TRY and only focus on "constructive criticism" of their peers, but authors are a sensitive bunch and still won't really like that. I don't know if it would really kill their careers, but they'd probably find themselves getting cold shoulders, especially if some of those authors they trash are close or in cliques with others
@@NonAnonDNot every reviewer trashes novels. Check "lilmizflashythang.wordpress.com. This one looks for the best parts of the story, and even if the blogger doesn't like the book, it's seen as if the blogger wasn't the targeted audience.
It seems overdramatic to call polite 3 or 4 star reviews "trashing your peers." I mean, maybe authors do feel that way, but as a reader and booktube viewer, it seems very weird. On booktube, a 4-star review is considered very positive, and a 3-star is still decent. And even a 2-star review is usually something like "I really disliked the book, but I can see why other people would like it," which I wouldn't call "trashing." I have actually read books based on the "recommendations" of booktubers who disliked them, so I feel like a negative review is better for authors than no review at all. "No publicity is bad publicity" basically (with the caveat that reviews should always be appropriate and not have needless personal attacks toward the author or anything like that).
Yeah no, hard disagree on the Reviewer vs Author one. I get where you are coming from, and the reality of the situation seems to back this up. But i think this doesnt stem from the fact Authors shouldnt critique their collegues, but from a inability to give and recieve constructive Feedback. Constructive being the keyword here. If another author was to critisize my book, assuming they used I-Statements, offered possible solutions and stayed respectful, there is absolutely no way in earth, where i should take this any other way than as an offer to improve myself. AN OFFER. I still have the ability to choose what feedback i value then. No hard feelings. In the context of me as a reader, looking for authors reviews, i might wanna be more careful, because their view on things they enjoy might be very different. Though thats also true for a lot of booktubers, since they read soooo much, as it is part of their Jobs, that things they felt are boring and stale are still new-ish to me. Tldr; Authors definetly CAN be Reviewers. Its a selfmade problem with a lack of skills in recieving and giving feedback.
Hmm but see I think if an author is going to offer good critique in this way, it should be as a writing group, etc. the critique after the book is published feels very different, and I think it isn’t the authors place. If you don’t have that relationship, why does it matter what you think? Why do they need to hear it from you specifically? They will have other reviewers to tell them these things. Of course, anyone can do whatever they want, I’m just advising caution. I certainly wouldn’t be out here reviewing and rating other TH-camrs videos and reviews. Some have come to me for advice and I’ve given feedback - because it was solicited.
Man you would hate my reviews then. I almost always 5 star everything. I only look for fun and star removal mean something bad happened. Immersion breaking things or patriarchal jokes in matriarchal society with zero men in power.
I say nothing in here about all 5 star reviews being a problem...? Many reviewers aren't critical and that's up to them, and in fact, if you are also an author, I literally say all 5 star reviews or no reviews is the way to go lmao
so if I disliked Way of Kings(i do, btw) I'm not allowed to say that if I'm publishing my work? Seems sus, as the kids are saying, like yeah, I get that your trying to support the community and such, but if you didn't like something, you should be able to comment on it, scientists peer-review their work all the time, what makes authors these thin-skinned babies that they can't take a bad comment for their work?(sorry aspiring author and yeah, I got triggered about that, I'm about halfway through way of kings, and yeah, people need to know what a boring piece of trash that is)
I literally say in this video that if you’re a self pub’d author reviewing traditionally published work is probably still ok so… I don’t actually say you couldn’t 😂
Noone said you're not allowed to, just that it's generally not wise or good etiquette. Being a self-published author is just a form of self-employment. And small person run businesses slagging each other off online is generally just not good practice. Again, you CAN do it, but I'm not sure that you SHOULD, or at least not get into a habit of it.
Agreed. Sanderson is a good author, maybe one of the best in the genre. But The Way of Kings is rife with issues and I have no idea how everyone can overlook that and put it on top of all the Best Fantasy books lists.
Thanks You Bookborn!!!
Just googled the title of my self-published book about a baseball player who is sent to a minor league team in New Hampshire.
Apparently, "The Catcher in the Rye" was already taken.
I was gonna make a similar joke, but I can't beat this 🤣
Self Pub authors that need readers on a budget should link up with other authors and trade feedback (aka critique partners). Just make sure you weed them out for competency, whether or not they actually read in your genre, and if they’ll follow through on their end (maybe try chapter by chapter or portion swaps and give them space to opt out if they aren’t clicking with your book… or vice versa)
Finding a good writing group is really hard but extremely helpful. You'll probably have to try a few out and that can be a lot of work, but like you said, trading critiques with people you trust is one of hte most hepful things you can do to improve your stories.
I’ve found aspiring-author patreons/discords that have great communities full of both best friends and willing beta-readers. It has simply been the best resource for improving my work, hands down. (Ellen Brock, in case anyone’s wondering - she’s an incredibly gifted youtube editor and highly recommended)!
@@wrafalkoThat is some excellent advice. I have been trying to get people to read my stuff for literal decades. I personally know about ten self-published authors (even one traditionally published) aaaaaaaand they don’t read books. None of my forays into wider/online spaces have worked out very well, but I never thought of a Patreon like Ellen Brock’s. Seems obvious, now that you’ve said it, but that’s the nature of genius I suppose. Thanks!
That last piece of advice rings true. There's a movie TH-camr named Chris Stuckmann who's taken no end of **** since he started making a crowd-funded movie of his own and, consequently, decided to move his channel "away from film criticism and toward film appreciation," as I believe he puts it.
Hell, even just as a reader I once had the awkward experience of mentioning that I'd sampled a certain British horror/dark fantasy author a few times over the years and never been able to get into his work, only to have the man himself acerbically comment, "I agree."
So awkard when authors respond to stuff like that 🥲 especially if they haven't been tagged lmao
@@Bookborn I legit felt bad, especially since I'd just finished reading a short story of his that I actually liked, LoL.
Bookborn every video: "I have the data"
🤣 The best.
🤣😭🤣
What's this world without DATA?? without NUMBERS?!
Titles: not even more popular, but sometimes there are indie books I look for that have a dozen books of the same name or are extremely close. I think it makes it difficult to find.
I'm an indie author as well (just starting out), and I think this is a pretty solid video. The biggest thing about beta readers for me was finding people willing to give some critical feedback (not just ones who read your genre). I thought it was all good, even sent it to some small indie reviewers, and everyone was giving it 4-5 stars. I sent it in to Daniel Greene (I had been watching him for a while and just wanted to see what would happen). He opened my package in a mail video and immediately said he was going to review it. He gave it a 3/10, but the feedback on the book was exactly what I needed to hear and I published a revised book last year based on that feedback. It's substantially better now, but it would have been nice to hear any of that feedback during the writing process.
Yeah that’s why I tried to focus on “people you trust” because that also means people you trust to give criticism! The example I gave of Brandon and I - that was some big, somewhat harsh criticism. But it was needed.
@@Bookborn getting that network in place is key. The only reader I really knew was my wife, 1) it's not her genre, 2) she didn't feel comfortable providing feedback. It may take a bit, but building those communities is also an important part of becoming an author. Lesson learned!
@@christhewritingjester3164 Highly recommend finding reliable and committed author groups if you can! I’ve found them to be priceless.
Thank you Bookborn!! As an author myself (Swedish) I spent years editing my novel along with an editor and several beta readers and other authors who I critique swapped my book with, and then it got published by a small press in 2020. It takes time to write something good, and there are no shortcuts! Badly edited books hurts us all as authors, especially us authors who aren't famous. We already have to prove that we are serious authors when competing with the big names, and self-published books having a bad reputation hurts us even more.
I have translated my Swedish epic fantasy novel now into English and I am going through the same process (though not with a developmental editor) with English native speaking beta readers, just to have the novel as well written as possible. As a Swede, I know that my English is not native level, so I miss lots of things that a native reader would pick up on. I take this seriously, as the Swedish novel got some five and several four star reviews. (It is kind of like a Swedish ASOIAF, but with much less sexual violence, set in a Scandinavian fantasy setting). I know it is a good book so I am taking this seriously.
Great advice. And thank you! I completely agree. I don't think writers should be serious reviewers. I feel weird saying that since my book has gotten good reviews from my peers-well written, insightful, and reasonably (?) fair. But I do think it can lead to conflicts of interest. Elliot Brooks and Daniel Green are notable exceptions for the reason you stated. They've firmly established their brand as a reviewer. (Sidenote: Le Guin has some spectacularly savage takedowns of other authors, but it's less a review and more of a hit job. If you're going to do that, you better aim for the head.) If I wanted to be a reviewer, I don't think I'd have the bandwidth to do both. Being a good reviewer takes a lot of time, talent, and energy.
My editing process: Alpha reader (my wife) --> Developmental editor --> Copy editor --> Beta readers --> Proofreader. This process is so involved and time consuming; I don't know if I could ever release more than one book a year. I spend a lot of time just being a project manager.
While I think a benefit of self-publishing is how much quicker the process can go, I agree with you that it still takes TIME. In general, if you want to make a quality product, you have to be willing to take that time - especially if your beta reviewers aren't paid, and are doing it in their free time.
I didn't look up Le Guin...I need to go see her take downs lmao.
Some of my favorite BookTubers have become self-published authors and I’ve been very supportive of their work but it does change the way I view them as reviewers. I haven’t stopped watching any of them but I just have to approach their reviews a little differently now that they have more skin in the game.
Yeah, I think this is a huge factor too. If they are reviewing books they are friends with, you might question how honest the review is. It's only natural!
Wholeheartedly agree on the developmental edit piece! I originally went trad until my agent quit the industry and I decided to self-publish, and I benefitted IMMENSELY from the rounds of developmental editing with my agent AND the feedback from big house editors. I don't regret facing those hurdles and critiques at all.
Generally I agree about the "don't be a reviewer as an author," except in the indie-sphere it causes a problem: it creates a dearth of honest, helpful reviews at the beginning stage. Everyone's either "hyping" a book or silent on it. Personally I'd take the review, good or bad. But I understand it's alienating, so *sigh* I suppose I agree.
Lastly, I was so bummed when I saw you weren't going to be a judge this year in SPFBO on the off-chance that my book was assigned to you. Glad for you to take a needed break, but you have such good reviews and insights!
Your second paragraph IS TRUE, but it's such a hard thing to fix. I think it can only be done through finding a writing group of peers that you all trust each other enough to be truthfully critical about the work. But I think it needs to happen in the editing stage - aka, when things can still be changed. I think criticism after the fact from peers can be difficult. But it's also a problem among reviewers. Because with self-pub'd, there is often less of a distance between author and reviewer, AND because we feel that our reviews may "mean more" because they are getting fewer reviews than trad pub'd authors, it can soften reviews. We don't want to crush these authors dreams! They are usually some of hte kindest, coolest people I've ever talked to! But I had to finally realize that as a reviewer, I had to be honest, or else it would ultimately hurt self-pub'd in the long run. but, idk. ITS ALL HARD lol
Hey, BB
This is exactly the kind of video-essay you do better than anyone!
Merci, merci, merci
Thank you 🙏
Editing has definitely improved, the prevalency of them was the problem with self pub. But based on the few I've read back when that first started becoming an avenue via KDP to now, it seems like it's not happening as frequently - self pub authors seem to be investing more in their books than before also.
I also agree with you on the third point, it's why I'll be avoiding certain books on here that I notice other reviewers will jump on and inevitably hype - those opinions can't be trusted anyway.
As Somebody who's working on his first Selfpublishing Release myself, I can totally agree with you on all of the Advices, especially the last One. Not because I think, that it wouldn't be possible to be a serious Reviewer and Writer at the same Time, but more because of the Polarized Times we're living in these Days. Thx for the Video. Highly appreciated it. 😁
Lots of great advice. Thank you. I just published my first book and went through so many of the "editing" options you mentioned. It took me a bit to realize that less is more when it comes to having your book edited. With regard to your comments on reviewing, I can see what you mean. I have read for years and reviewed here and there, but only on Goodreads. I actually don't do any video reviewing. I'd prefer not to. What I think is actually more important as a "writer" is not to read your reviews. STay out of the reviewers spaces with regards to your own book. Now that I agree with 100% :)
I think reading your reviews can be helpful in some cases, but I'd say avoid one star reviews which will most likely never be helpful lmao
@@Bookborn LOL you definitely have a point here!!! In with the good, out with the bad!
I'm a musician first and want to write as more of a side hobby but most of this advice applies to that as well, you don't want to leave bad reviews on other works because then it looks like you're trying to bring everyone else down to lift you up.
Worked in self publishing for a few years. This is spot on. There were some amazing authors, but also, my goodness, so many people refused to listen to professional advice.
What an interesting video. If you think about it, it just really makes sense not to review your colleagues' work online. When my colleague does something that could be better, I'll go to them if I think it is important enough. This will help them much more.
I plan to self publish and think this is great advice. I have reviewed some books, but I haven’t been too critical. If I don’t like elements, I tend to keep it to myself and focus on what was done well and who I think the right target audience of the book is. If it’s really awful I don’t review. But I also don’t have a ton of time to review anyway, so some books I’ve been meaning to review are still outstanding. I will really give some thought to my strategy here. Thanks for the thought provoking comments.
If anyone's wondering, I think Sanderson talked about only reviewing books he loves in his review of Project Hail Mary by Andy Weir
I didnt watch that review so he’s def mentioned it on other things before! My guess is he talks about it before talking about any books lol
I feel weird every time I post a review that isn’t five stars. I love how you articulated that because I felt disigenuine for not wanting to post reviews for books I don’t love.
On reviewing as an author: You mention the problem of alienating a significant part of the people who might otherwise help you sell your book (I agree it's a significant problem). There's also the problem of not wanting to say critical things about the babies of your friends, which can make it both difficult and unpleasant to give honest reviews.
Am I rating this book 5-star because it's legitimately brilliant or is that affected by it having been written by my friend? Or am I looking for flaws in what would otherwise be a 5-star read in an attempt to bend over backwards for fairness?
And finally, I'm pretty sure I've heard Sanderson say that he won't make critical comments about any but the most successful authors' work, because it can be, or be seen to be, "punching down", which isn't a good look either.
yes yes yes to all of this. Besides it not looking good, you're absolutely right that the more you know someone, the more predisposed you'll be to like their work. Which also means people might trust your ratings less. That is, unless you're KNOWN For being brutally honest. Which...comes full circle to alienating your peers.
Finding editors that will give you criticism instead of just support, outside of that trad business infrastructure, can be difficult i imagine. I would want to just tell them they're great!
Established authors, I look at less as reviewers, and more like curators.
curators is a great word for it. And yeah, it's difficult, it's true. Networking is probably one of hte most important things in success of a self-pub'd author.
Yes, I do kind of want to disagree on the last point but I think there probably is at least some truth to what you're saying, even if I don't like it and don't agree completely. I do think people should be allowed to say whatever they want about books, but I realize you're not saying they shouldn't, you're just saying that it is probably better for one's prospects as an author. Of course, great video, as usual, and I'm pretty sure I've had that same experience with the titles of self-pub books.
I'm laughing because you did come around to what I said in the end 😂People can absolutely do whatever they want! It just doesn't always mean it's a good idea lol
Mark Lawrence seems to be doing reviews on Goodreads. Although I find his reviews are always more about his personal journey with the book than an actual critical review.
Loved the video! If I ever write a book I'll be sure to keep these in mind.
The title thing, ugh. When I put out my first book nobody had my exact title. Then Disney/Pixar came out with the same title years later. I've been buried! It's so frustrating.
Noooooo this is the WORST
You cooked on this one! Thank you for all the great insight
I usually only rate books on Goodreads. I usually have a good idea if I will like a book before I read it, so I won't normally need to rate something 3 stars or below.
I will leave written reviews for indie published books that I particularly enjoyed, and will try to leave ARC reviews for my indie author friends if I am able to read the book before the release date.
Yeah, I don't think reviewing PERIOD is bad, but being a review-er is different than just reviewing books. What you've stated is pretty close to what a lot of authors do - giving reviews out to books they've received arcs for (usually, if not always, positive). I don't think it's bad to still rate books, but being an actual, critical reviewer, is very different, ya know?
@@Bookborn 100% agreed.
omg as soon as you said "I only found one author who did reviews" I KNEW it was Rothfuss. I randomly come across his reviews on goodreads and sometimes, they are just... weird. He'll give a book 5 stars but in his review he mostly just talks about himself or something completely unrelated. It always felt weird to see a famous, established author doing reviews
He’s chaotic 🙃
Yeah sounds like Pat 😂 I love him forever for being such a weirdo
A lot of older weird fiction -- Arthur Machen, etc. -- is predominantly available in self--published editions from budding Amazon entrepreneurs, and the frequent, knock me right out of the story typo struggle is real.
The amount of books being released has made it hard to create original titles. You're right, though, if there is already some bestseller out there, your book will get buried.
Yeah I don't think you need to be completely original or anything - even tweaking an adjective or noun can go a long way though to make it slightly different.
I can't remember which one, but one of my books I've yet to read has a missing map with a note to insert the image...
Honestly, I used to read every self pub book that came across my desk, and in the past year or so I had to start becoming significantly more selective with what I decide to read. There are some amazing stand outs in the self pub community but I was constantly hearing "oh I only did one round of edits" or "no, I've actually never taken any writing classes" and the quality in a lot of the books I was reading reflected this. Don't get me wrong, I love self pub, some of ny favorite books are self pub, but I havent seen one in a WHILE that had a consistent quality. Every now and then I'll pick one up though.
I’m curious, do you have a process for selecting the few of the many that show up your desk? What is it that makes a book in the pile stand out to you?
Love hearing the developmental editing advice! Thanks for that!
As for authors being reviewers, I see where you're coming from, but also have a personal counter example.
I review my peers on Facebook, and I'm pretty good at it. My posts regularly get 50-150 likes and many comments full of words and discussions.
That is a product of me picking the right pics + being thorough and thought-provoking in the review.
Also I try to be fun :)
I can get a song to earworm into people when I review :)
I can make them laugh often :)
I know my audience :)
Haven't gotten into any issues with this, ever. I choose my words carefully.
Few examples:
1) "This wasn't for me"
2) "Here's 3 things I liked and 3 things I didn't like about this book"
3) "I don't recommend this to MY audience, but here is the audience that I DO recommend this to"
My only weakness is DNFs.
When I start someone's book and dislike it so bad that I can't finish, usually that author and I get into bad terms :(
Still, it's worth the audience that I'm gathering with my reviews :)
I'm glad you feel it's working out for you! I still stand by what I said though. You know your audience, and I'm guessing your audience is not other authors - which is usually the case with reviews. But that doesn't mean you know exactly how other authors are taking your reviews. Perhaps it will be worth the audience you've gained in the end, only you'll be able to decide!
Kind of hate to say it but I think you're right about the last point. I don't feel comfortable giving fewer than 5 *s to my friends, and that makes me a lousy reviewer (my channel has no reviews, I just talk about elements of books).
Yeah and I think talking about books in that way is a great choice! I know Jed Herne has a lot of success with his channel about writing - I think it’s the way to go for authors who want a presence like that
I’m a college student and can’t afford a real dev editor, but I totally agree with the stuff about having lots of beta readers and ones who read in your genre. My family doesn’t read any epic fantasy but my friends do and I also have a writing group that writes epic fantasy that I run it through as well. And then I’ll hire a couple of beta readers who read in my genre from fiverr ive found that are fairly cheap but seem good. Hopefully it’s enough editing, time will tell I suppose lol.
I only list books on Goodreads I really like. I used to review on Amazon everything I read - good, bad, or indifferent - but that isn't an effective use of time. I try to support authors' books I enjoyed, traditional or indie published. Trying to give a good review of a book you didn't quite get into doesn't come off well.
Good advice, I just wish it was easier to find a critique partner and beta readers. Good call on the googling the title.
I know, it's easy advice to give but difficult to follow 😭getting a good writing group is a lot of luck
Self publishing is a unique experience to each author, and each reader. When we say trad publishing it's often the big houses that come to mind. When we say self publishing the first thought is likely Amazon, and there is so much more variety to Amazon than a handfull of long standing publishing houses.
It's sad to see some people lump all of these books into one umbrella of "self published." There are trends and themes of course, but its hardly as unifying a label as "traditionally published."
All of this was great advice, I have been an author since I was 17 thanks to the accessability of publishing and largely that has spurred me to grow as a writer. There's a lot of condesencion as well as genuine advice on the topic. One is often framed as the other.
Good advice, especially about using beta readers. I don't think any debut author should invest more money into self publishing a book than what they can afford to lose, because they will likely lose most of it. That's the nature of the business. Discovery is the major hurtle to success in self publishing, and any money spent on editing won't help if the book is never even seen by readers. It may be a different story for established authors who can rely on sales to pay for professional help.
I agree about not reviewing self published books unless they are really good. If I read one I don't like, I know that I'm simply not the right audience, so not liking it is on me, and don't review it. We're all in the same boat. Plus, the mostly trad published books I do review, I only post the reviews on my blog where few people read them. I just like playing the critic.
My plan if I were to ever self-publish is to keep my original personal Goodreads account to keep track of what I read (and review if I felt like it) and then have a separate author account. Do you think that would also be a bad idea?
Ms. Bookborn, all of your vids are great & informative :-) I'm also working on a script with strong female characters, & trying not to make them too "Mary Sue" :-O
I really agree with you on the last point. I'm a big fan of Elliott's channel, but I've noticed she's gotten more reticent in her reviews. Like she doesn't want to be "mean" to fellow indie authors. I haven't noticed that with Daniel, but he's overall more combative than she is. Lol.
Hey bookborn. I’m not on IG. Which books are you reading right now? Can we expect review of the remaining ASOIAF companion books ? (F&B and AWOIAF). Thanks
Great video.
The main thing that takes me out of a book is when they write ‘they have another think coming’. You can’t have a think coming for you, it’s a thing, an object or something but definitely not a think!! It really annoys me that something so basic gets missed in editing. It’s basic English and they can’t even get it right, it’s so ridiculous😒
i feel like an aluminum ingot that just got extruded. your advice is very generous, thorough and obviously based on experience and involvement in the publishing industry, but from my own p.o.v., your 3 Things are only valuable for someone who is writing de facto as an employee of the publishing industry. we've got books - thousands daily - being self-published and pubbed traditionally...but the truly original is rare-earth metal that gets skimmed off and tossed away as slag in favor of pure genre.
Great video🎉
Good ❤
Of all the authors out there… Totally hypothetically & just for fun… Do you think Abercrombie would be the best choice to finish ASOIAF? Which fantasy author you think would be best suited based on style etc? Be brave professor
I don't want anyone but Martin to finish ASOIAF. I'd rather it sit unfinished. I understand why people say Abercrombie - he is excellent at characters- but idk. I like the story Martin is telling and I just want him to finish it 🥲 even if that means never seeing Dream of Spring.
@@BookbornYeah I dont want anyone to finish his work… I think it’s a fascinating question as an exercise in how some authors are similar in style… or closer in feel whatever that means! while others are miles apart & on different planets though equally enjoyable… thanks!
Traditional publishers publish all different quality levels of books. It's a business, they need an income stream, but they still promote the idea that self-published books aren't as good. Readers don't so much care how a book is published. Rather, does the story pull them and in and make them turn the pages?
Idk, I haven't encountered traditionally published books that are riddled with errors. They usually have some sort of process because they are publishing houses with resources and to-do's in place, not to mention the hurdle of even getting an agent or getting a deal. Whereas, self-publishing has zero barriers, which means it's possible to have literally ZERO editing or processes. So I do think there is potentially a difference there. But I do think the quality of self-pub is rising.
@@Bookborn Some self-pub authors don't realize what they are getting into. There's a lot of responsibility. I've read some amazing self-pub books, and some terrible ones.
I totally get what she’s saying it’s best to just stay out of that whole mess
I don't trust Goodreads or any community social media-based site, because they all devolve into gatekeepers of what's considered "good" and "bad." Plus it's also ripe with people bringing their bias and baggage, just like that one woman who lost her deal by trying to game the system when she was outed for trashing other publishers. It becomes the issue of people who can't grow out of high school antics and over self-importance and aspirations of being "that guy/gal."
At least in the LitRPG sub-genre I disagree on the editing not being an issue. I get that there will always be a bit of minor punctuation/grammar issues in even trad published books, but even basic sentence structure gets brutally mutilated and repeats frequently in even the most popular series. The most common error that irritates me is a duplicated descriptive action. This is a bit exaggerated but it would be something like "They quietly crept down the hall in a quiet way because it was important to be quiet so the walked quietly." This type of repetitive descriptions in sentences permeates the genre and really distracts from the story.
side note: how has the Gaiman news hit with people? Just learned about this last night.
I need more evidence. I am big Gaiman fan but always felt his sex life is a bit “punk rock”. Hearing this I am not surprised but I am pretty weary about the source. Also people make mistakes and this was supposed to be in consensual relationships. It depends how this is going to be handled. There’s a difference between abusing power and SA and grooming and making stupid mistakes in consensual relationship. Again, need more evidence. Need his response etc.
Thanks for putting yourself out there. I’m at a bit different place with it right now, but I really respect how you’re approaching it from multiple angles and trying not to rush to judgement.
I've considered making a video on it, actually - but I rewatched my video I made about a year ago about authors where you don't agree with their opinions/actions, and I realized I had said my entire piece back then. It was a really hard pill to swallow. I've talked about how much his words ahve meant to me, and I didn't realize that I really admired him.
Now, of course, some of the accusations could be false - but Gaiman has admitted publicly that some of the stuff is true, and of the stuff he has admitted to, I am VERY uncomfortable with. Truthfully, I'm still not sure how I feel about it. I cannot take back what his words have meant to me. Nor do I think you need to be a good person to make good art. But, I'm conflicted about wanting to talk about his work because I find his behavior unacceptable.
@@Bookborn Thanks for going into your feelings about it. I remember that vid of yours. It's not an easy subject to talk about. There were recently some very difficult revelations about Alice Munro as well, an author that's loomed large in my life. We develop strong emotional connections with our impressions of who our favourite artists are, and it can be painful when these images are suddenly shattered.
@@bookdmb YES. I do not consider myself someone who worships celebrity, AT ALL. But I think when a piece of art has profoundly affected you, it's natural to project a bit onto what kind of person you think created it. IT can be difficult when that is shattered.
Of course, it was Rothfuss 😂
Nobody is surprised ☠️
Yeah, authors need to give up on reviewing their peers for sure. Best case scenario, you make it public when you’re giving it 5 stars and keep the rest all private, or you keep it all private. I’m surprised this is controversial? It really is basic business sense and human interactions… you want to be free to trash your peers to a potential audience as an authoritative figure? I mean you can, but they absolutely will be pissed about it and either not support you or actively work against you in return.
Right. This should be common sense.
What about a reviewer who doesn't try to trash any books, always looks for a positive, and then gets a lucky break and a book deal? Do they now have to stop reviewing books that they've read?
@@charissawilkinson9270 No, but they probably have to switch genres to ones they don't write in and/or only post their positive reviews. It would be unwise to trash the books of authors in a genre they're writing in. They can TRY and only focus on "constructive criticism" of their peers, but authors are a sensitive bunch and still won't really like that.
I don't know if it would really kill their careers, but they'd probably find themselves getting cold shoulders, especially if some of those authors they trash are close or in cliques with others
@@NonAnonDNot every reviewer trashes novels. Check "lilmizflashythang.wordpress.com. This one looks for the best parts of the story, and even if the blogger doesn't like the book, it's seen as if the blogger wasn't the targeted audience.
It seems overdramatic to call polite 3 or 4 star reviews "trashing your peers." I mean, maybe authors do feel that way, but as a reader and booktube viewer, it seems very weird. On booktube, a 4-star review is considered very positive, and a 3-star is still decent. And even a 2-star review is usually something like "I really disliked the book, but I can see why other people would like it," which I wouldn't call "trashing."
I have actually read books based on the "recommendations" of booktubers who disliked them, so I feel like a negative review is better for authors than no review at all. "No publicity is bad publicity" basically (with the caveat that reviews should always be appropriate and not have needless personal attacks toward the author or anything like that).
Yeah no, hard disagree on the Reviewer vs Author one. I get where you are coming from, and the reality of the situation seems to back this up. But i think this doesnt stem from the fact Authors shouldnt critique their collegues, but from a inability to give and recieve constructive Feedback. Constructive being the keyword here.
If another author was to critisize my book, assuming they used I-Statements, offered possible solutions and stayed respectful, there is absolutely no way in earth, where i should take this any other way than as an offer to improve myself. AN OFFER. I still have the ability to choose what feedback i value then. No hard feelings.
In the context of me as a reader, looking for authors reviews, i might wanna be more careful, because their view on things they enjoy might be very different. Though thats also true for a lot of booktubers, since they read soooo much, as it is part of their Jobs, that things they felt are boring and stale are still new-ish to me.
Tldr; Authors definetly CAN be Reviewers. Its a selfmade problem with a lack of skills in recieving and giving feedback.
Hmm but see I think if an author is going to offer good critique in this way, it should be as a writing group, etc. the critique after the book is published feels very different, and I think it isn’t the authors place. If you don’t have that relationship, why does it matter what you think? Why do they need to hear it from you specifically? They will have other reviewers to tell them these things.
Of course, anyone can do whatever they want, I’m just advising caution. I certainly wouldn’t be out here reviewing and rating other TH-camrs videos and reviews. Some have come to me for advice and I’ve given feedback - because it was solicited.
Whats your husbands book(s)? Id like to try it out
The Threadlight Trilogy
Man you would hate my reviews then. I almost always 5 star everything. I only look for fun and star removal mean something bad happened. Immersion breaking things or patriarchal jokes in matriarchal society with zero men in power.
I say nothing in here about all 5 star reviews being a problem...? Many reviewers aren't critical and that's up to them, and in fact, if you are also an author, I literally say all 5 star reviews or no reviews is the way to go lmao
so if I disliked Way of Kings(i do, btw) I'm not allowed to say that if I'm publishing my work? Seems sus, as the kids are saying, like yeah, I get that your trying to support the community and such, but if you didn't like something, you should be able to comment on it, scientists peer-review their work all the time, what makes authors these thin-skinned babies that they can't take a bad comment for their work?(sorry aspiring author and yeah, I got triggered about that, I'm about halfway through way of kings, and yeah, people need to know what a boring piece of trash that is)
I literally say in this video that if you’re a self pub’d author reviewing traditionally published work is probably still ok so… I don’t actually say you couldn’t 😂
@@Bookborn I guess, but I don't get it, I guess, bad reviews make me a better writer, no matter who I get them from
Noone said you're not allowed to, just that it's generally not wise or good etiquette.
Being a self-published author is just a form of self-employment. And small person run businesses slagging each other off online is generally just not good practice. Again, you CAN do it, but I'm not sure that you SHOULD, or at least not get into a habit of it.
@@thecrispymaster This is it, right here. Thank you for explaining it.
Agreed. Sanderson is a good author, maybe one of the best in the genre. But The Way of Kings is rife with issues and I have no idea how everyone can overlook that and put it on top of all the Best Fantasy books lists.